The canon of the New Testament is the set of books many modern Christians regard as divinely inspired and constituting the New Testament of the Christian Bible. For most churches, the canon is an agreed-upon list of 27 books that includes the canonical Gospels, Acts, letters attributed to various apostles, and Revelation.
Although the list of what books constituted the canon (i.e., list of books to read out in church) initially differed among the geographically-separated churches in antiquity, according to ancient church historian Eusebius, there is a consensus that the 27 books constituting the canon today are the same 27 books generally recognized in the first centuries.[1]
For historical Christians, canonicalization was based on whether the material was written by the apostles or their close associates, rather than claims of divine inspiration. However, some biblical scholars with diverse disciplines now reject the claim that any texts of the Bible were written by the earliest apostles (though many of the Pauline letters were likely written by Paul or close associates of his).[2]
For most churches, the canon is an agreed-upon list of 27 books that includes the canonical Gospels, Acts, letters attributed to various apostles, and Revelation. Although there are many textual variations, most scholars believe that the original text of the New Testament can be established with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
The core books of the New Testament were completed before 120 AD, with the Gospels being finished slightly earlier (the first of which, Mark, was likely written close to 70 AD).[5] Although the list of what books constituted the canon (i.e., list of books to read out in church) initially differed among the geographically-separated churches in antiquity, according to ancient church historian Eusebius there was a consensus that the same 27 books constituting the canon today were the same 27 books generally recognized in the first century.[6]
For the first three hundred years of Christianity, there was no entirely agreed-upon canon. Some of Paul's letters and the four Gospels whose authorship were attributed to Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were read publicly in certain churches. The earliest record of attempt at compiling a canon was made by Marcion,, who accepted only a modified version of Luke and ten of Paul's letters, while rejecting the Old Testament entirely.[7] After the council of Nicaea in year 325, Roman Emperor Constantine instructed Eusebius to put together accepted Christian Scriptures that would be displayed in churches. However, nothing is known if Eusebius was successful in completing the task.
One of the oldest bibles in existence is the Codex Vaticanus which was written around year 350. The Codex is currently kept in the Vatican Library. It has the 27 books of the New Testament which are accepted by all Christian denominations today. The 27 books were canonized in the council of Hippo in year 393. This was later affirmed in the council of Carthage in year 397 and 419.[8] Evidence corroborates the claims of the fourth century church councils that their canonical list are the same 27 books that the church received from the earliest bishops.[9] Irenaeus (died) quotes and cites 21 books that would end up as part of the New Testament, but does not use Philemon, Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 3 John and Jude.[10] By the early 3rd century, Origen of Alexandria may have been using the same 27 books as in the modern New Testament, though there were still disputes over the canonicity of Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, and Revelation[11] (see also Antilegomena). Likewise by 200, the Muratorian fragment shows that there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to what is now the New Testament, which included four gospels and argued against objections to them.[12] Thus, while there was plenty of discussion in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the "major" writings were accepted by almost all Christian authorities by the middle of the second century.[13]
The next two hundred years followed a similar process of continual discussion throughout the entire Church, and localized refinements of acceptance. This process was not yet complete at the time of the First Council of Nicaea in 325, though substantial progress had been made by then. Though a list was clearly necessary to fulfill Constantine's commission in 331 of fifty copies of the Bible for the Church at Constantinople, no concrete evidence exists to indicate that it was considered to be a formal canon. In the absence of a canonical list, the resolution of questions would normally have been directed through the see of Constantinople, in consultation with Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea (who was given the commission), and perhaps other bishops who were available locally.
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a list of exactly the same books that would formally become the New Testament canon, and he used the word "canonized" (Greek, Ancient (to 1453);: κανονιζομενα) in regard to them. The first council that accepted the present Catholic canon (the Canon of Trent) was the Council of Rome, held by Pope Damasus I (382). A second council was held at the Synod of Hippo (393) reaffirming the previous council list. A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the Council of Carthage (397) and the Council of Carthage (419).[14] These councils took place under the authority of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed.[15] Pope Damasus I's Council of Rome in 382, if the Decretum Gelasianum is correctly associated with it, issued a biblical canon identical to that mentioned above, or if not the list is at least a 6th-century compilation[16] claiming a 4th-century imprimatur.[17] Likewise, Damasus's commissioning of the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible,, was instrumental in the fixation of the canon in the West.[18] In 405, Pope Innocent I sent a list of the sacred books to a Gallic bishop, Exsuperius of Toulouse. When these bishops and councils spoke on the matter, however, they were not defining something new, but instead "were ratifying what had already become the mind of the church."[19] Thus, from the 5th century onward, the Western Church was unanimous concerning the New Testament canon.[20]
The last book to be accepted universally was the Book of Revelation. However, with time all the Eastern Church also agreed. Thus, by the 5th century, both the Western and Eastern churches had come into agreement on the matter of the New Testament canon.[21]
Writings attributed to the apostles circulated among the earliest Christian communities. The Pauline epistles were circulating, perhaps in collected forms, by the end of the 1st century AD. Justin Martyr, in the mid 2nd century, mentions "memoirs of the apostles" as being read on "the day called that of the sun" (Sunday) alongside the "writings of the prophets."[23] A defined set of four gospels (the Tetramorph) was asserted by Irenaeus, c. 180, who refers to it directly.[24]
By the early 3rd century, Origen may have been using the same twenty-seven books as in the present New Testament canon, though there were still disputes over the acceptance of the Letter to the Hebrews, James, II Peter, II John, III John, Jude and Revelation, known as the Antilegomena. Likewise, the Muratorian fragment is evidence that perhaps as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to the twenty-seven book NT canon, which included four gospels and argued against objections to them. Thus, while there was a good measure of debate in the Early Church over the New Testament canon, the major writings are claimed to have been accepted by almost all Christians by the middle of the 3rd century.
In his Easter letter of 367, Athanasius, Bishop of Alexandria, gave a list of the books that form the modern twenty-seven-book NT canon, and he used the word "canonized" (Greek, Ancient (to 1453);: κανονιζόμενα kanonizomena) in regard to them. The first council that accepted the present canon of the New Testament may have been the Synod of Hippo Regius in North Africa (393). A brief summary of the acts was read at and accepted by the Councils of Carthage in 397 and 419. These councils were under the authority of St. Augustine, who regarded the canon as already closed. Pope Damasus I's Council of Rome in 382, if the Decretum Gelasianum is correctly associated with it, issued a biblical canon identical to that mentioned above, or, if not, the list is at least a 6th-century compilation.[25] Likewise, Damasus' commissioning of the Latin Vulgate edition of the Bible,, was instrumental in the fixation of the canon in the West. In, Pope Innocent I sent a list of the sacred books to a Gallic bishop, Exsuperius of Toulouse. Christian scholars assert that, when these bishops and councils spoke on the matter, however, they were not defining something new but instead "were ratifying what had already become the mind of the Church."
Thus, some claim that, from the 4th century, there existed unanimity in the West concerning the New Testament canon, and that, by the 5th century, the Eastern Church, with a few exceptions, had come to accept the Book of Revelation and thus had come into harmony on the matter of the canon.[26]
Full dogmatic articulations of the canon were not made until the Canon of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism, the Gallic Confession of Faith of 1559 for Calvinism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.
Martin Luther made his own canon, relegating without numbers various "disputed" New Testament books that did not meet his criteria to a section sometimes marked "Apocrypha" at the end of the Bible (German: die Apokryphen) after the "true and certain chief books": these were Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation. [27]
| Books | Marcionite canon[28] | Muratorian fragment[29] | Origen | Cyril of Jerusalem | Athanasius' Easter letter[30] and Modern | Syriac Peshitta | Gothic Bible[31] [32] | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [33] | ||||||||
| [34] | ||||||||
| [35] | ||||||||
| [36] | ||||||||
| (Secondary Rank)[37] | ||||||||
| 1 Clement | ||||||||
| 2 Clement | ||||||||
| Shepherd of Hermas | ||||||||
| Epistle of Barnabas | ||||||||
| Apocalypse of Peter | ||||||||
| Book of Wisdom |
Not all codexes were intended to contain complete New Testaments.
| Books | Codex Vaticanus[38] | Codex Sinaiticus[39] | Codex Alexandrinus[40] | Codex Ephraemi Rescriptus[41] | Palimpsest Uncial 048[42] | Codex Washingtonianus[43] and Codex Freerianus[44] fragments | Earliest Vetus Latina codex fragments[45] |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (W) | |||||||
| (W) | |||||||
| (W) | |||||||
| (W) | |||||||
| (W) | |||||||
| 1 Clement | |||||||
| 2 Clement | |||||||
| Shepherd of Hermas | |||||||
| Epistle of Barnabas | |||||||
| Apocalypse of Peter | |||||||
| Book of Wisdom | |||||||
See also: Early Christianity and History of Early Christianity.
By the end of the 1st century, some letters of Paul were known to Clement of Rome (fl. 96), together with some form of the "words of Jesus"; but while Clement valued these highly, he did not refer to them as "Scripture" ("graphe"), a term he reserved for the Septuagint. draws the following conclusion about Clement:
See main article: Marcion of Sinope. Marcion of Sinope, a bishop of Asia Minor who went to Rome and was later excommunicated for his views, may have been the first of record to propose a definitive, exclusive, unique list of Christian scriptures, compiled sometime between 130 and 140 AD.[46] [47] Whether his canon was preceded by that of the Church is debated.[48] Though Ignatius did address Christian scripture,[49] before Marcion, against the perceived heresies of the Judaizers and Docetists, he did not define a list of scriptures. In his book Origin of the New Testament[50] Adolf von Harnack argued that Marcion viewed the church at this time as largely an Old Testament church (one that "follows the Testament of the Creator-God") without a firmly established New Testament canon, and that the church gradually formulated its New Testament canon in response to the challenge posed by Marcion.
Marcion rejected the theology of the Old Testament entirely and regarded the God depicted there as an inferior being. In the Antithesis, he claimed the theology of the Old Testament was incompatible with the teaching of Jesus regarding God and morality.
Marcion created a definite group of books that he regarded as fully authoritative, displacing all others. This comprised ten of the Pauline epistles (without the Pastorals) and a gospel similar to that of Luke. It is uncertain whether he edited these books, purging them of what did not accord with his views, or whether his versions represented a separate textual tradition.
Marcion's gospel, called simply the Gospel of the Lord, differed from the Gospel of Luke by lacking any passages that connected Jesus with the Old Testament. He believed that the god of Israel, who gave the Torah to the Israelites, was an entirely different god from the Supreme God who sent Jesus and inspired the New Testament. Marcion termed his collection of Pauline epistles the Apostolikon. These also differed from the versions accepted by later Christian Orthodoxy.Marcion's list and theology were rejected as heretical by the early church; however, he forced other Christians to consider which texts were canonical and why. He spread his beliefs widely; they became known as Marcionism. In the introduction to his book Early Christian Writings, Henry Wace stated:
quotes Tertullian's De praescriptione haereticorum 30:
Note 61 of page 308 adds:
Other scholars propose that it was Melito of Sardis who originally coined the phrase Old Testament,[51] which is associated with Supersessionism.
Robert M. Price argues that the evidence that the early church fathers, such as Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp, knew of the Pauline epistles is unclear, and concludes that Marcion was the first person to collect Paul's writings to various churches and to treat ten Pauline letters, some of them Marcion's own compositions, together with an earlier version of Luke (not the Gospel of Luke as now known):
In the mid-2nd century, Justin Martyr (whose writings span the period from c. 145 to 163) mentions the "memoirs of the apostles", which Christians called "gospels" and which were regarded as on par with the Old Testament.[23] [52] Scholars are divided on whether there is any evidence that Justin included the Gospel of John among the "memoirs of the apostles", or whether, on the contrary, he based his doctrine of the Logos on it.[53] Justin quotes the letters of Paul, 1 Peter, and Acts in his writings.
In Justin's works, distinct references are found to Romans, 1 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and 2 Thessalonians, and possible ones to Philippians, Titus, and 1 Timothy. In addition, he refers to an account from an unnamed source of the baptism of Jesus which differs from that provided by the synoptic gospels:
See main article: Diatessaron.
See also: Gospel harmony. Tatian was converted to Christianity by Justin Martyr on a visit to Rome and returned to Syria in 172 to reform the church there.[54]
Irenaeus of Lyon referred directly to a defined set of four gospels (the Tetramorph), c. 180.[55] In his central work, Adversus Haereses Irenaeus denounced various early Christian groups that used only one gospel, such as Marcionism which used only Marcion's version of Luke, or the Ebionites which seem to have used an Aramaic version of Matthew, as well as groups that used more than four gospels, such as the Valentinians (A.H. 1.11).
Based on the arguments Irenaeus made in support of only four authentic gospels, some interpreters deduce that the fourfold Gospel must have still been a novelty in Irenaeus's time. Against Heresies 3.11.7 acknowledges that many heterodox Christians use only one gospel while 3.11.9 acknowledges that some use more than four. The success of Tatian's Diatessaron in about the same time period is "...a powerful indication that the fourfold Gospel contemporaneously sponsored by Irenaeus was not broadly, let alone universally, recognized."
Irenaeus apparently quotes from 21 of the New Testament books and names the author he thought wrote the text.[56] He mentions the four gospels, Acts, the Pauline epistles with the exception of Hebrews and Philemon, as well as the first epistle of Peter, and the first and second epistles of John, and the book of Revelation. Irenaeus argued that it was illogical to reject Acts of the Apostles but accept the Gospel of Luke, as both were from the same author; in Against Heresies 3.12.12[57] he ridiculed those who think they are wiser than the Apostles because the Apostles were still under Jewish influence. He may also refer to Hebrews (Book 2, Chapter 30) and James (Book 4, Chapter 16) and maybe even 2 Peter (Book 5, Chapter 28) but does not cite Philemon, 3 John or Jude.[58]
He does think that the letter to the Corinthians, known now as 1 Clement, was of great worth but does not seem to believe that Clement of Rome was the one author (Book 3, Chapter 3, Verse 3) and seems to have the same lower status as Polycarp's Epistle (Book 3, Chapter 3, Verse 3). He does refer to a passage in the Shepherd of Hermas as scripture (Mandate 1 or First Commandment), but this has some consistency problems on his part. Hermas taught that Jesus was not himself a divine being, but a virtuous man who was subsequently filled with the Holy Spirit and adopted as the Son[59] [60] (a doctrine called adoptionism). But Irenaeus's own work, including his citing of the Gospel of John (Jn. 1:1), indicates that he himself believed that Jesus was always God.
See also: Christian heresy. In the late 4th century Epiphanius of Salamis (died 402) Panarion 29 says the Nazarenes had rejected the Pauline epistles and Irenaeus Against Heresies 26.2 says the Ebionites rejected him.
Acts 21:21 records a rumor that Paul aimed to subvert the Old Testament (against this rumor see Romans 3:8, 3:31).
Peter 3:16 says his letters have been abused by heretics who twist them around "as they do with the other scriptures."
In the 2nd and 3rd centuries Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History 6.38 says the Elchasai "made use of texts from every part of the Old Testament and the Gospels; it rejects the Apostle (Paul) entirely"; 4.29.5 says Tatian the Assyrian rejected Paul's Letters and Acts of the Apostles; 6.25 says Origen accepted 22 canonical books of the Hebrews plus Maccabees plus the four Gospels, one epistle of Peter "perhaps also a second, but this is doubtful," the apocalypse of John, by John an "epistle of very few lines; perhaps also a second and third", and the epistles of Paul who "did not so much as write to all the churches that he taught; and even to those to which he wrote he sent but a few lines."[61] In all, Origen's canon is suggested to be identical to that of Athanasius.
Marcion may have been the first to have a clearly defined list of New Testament books, though this question of who came first is still debated. The compilation of this list could have been a challenge and incentive to emerging Proto-orthodoxy; if they wished to deny that Marcion's list was the true one, it was incumbent on them to define what the true one was. The expansion phase of the New Testament canon thus could have begun in response to Marcion's proposed limited canon.
See main article: Muratorian fragment. The Muratorian fragment is the earliest known example of a defined list of mostly New Testament books. It survives, damaged and thus incomplete, as a bad Latin translation of an original, no longer extant, Greek text that is usually dated in the late 2nd century,[62] [63] [64] [65] [66] [67] although a few scholars have preferred a 4th-century date.[68] [69] This is an excerpt from Metzger's translation:
This is evidence that, perhaps as early as 200, there existed a set of Christian writings somewhat similar to what is now the 27-book NT, which included four gospels and argued against objections to them.
See main article: Alogi. There were those who rejected the Gospel of John (and possibly also Revelation and the Epistles of John) as either not apostolic or as written by the Gnostic Cerinthus or as not compatible with the Synoptic Gospels. Epiphanius of Salamis called these people the Alogi, because they rejected the Logos doctrine of John and because he claimed they were illogical. There may have also been a dispute over the doctrine of the Paraclete.[70] Gaius or Caius, presbyter of Rome (early 3rd century), was apparently associated with this movement.[71]
It has recently been suggested that Origen (c. 184 – c. 253) has an identical or nearly identical canon to that of Athanasius in 367.[72] [73] Origen writes in his Homilies on Joshua:
Matthew first sounded the priestly trumpet in his Gospel; Mark also; Luke and John each played their own priestly trumpets. Even Peter cries out with trumpets in two of his epistles; also James and Jude. In addition, John also sounds the trumpet through his epistles, and Luke, as he describes the Acts of the Apostles. And now that last one comes, the one who said, 'I think God displays us apostles last' [1 Cor 4:9], and in fourteen of his epistles, thundering with trumpets, he casts down the walls of Jericho and all the devices of idolatry and dogmas of philosophers, all the way to the foundations.[74]
The list does not specify Revelation, but Origen elsewhere expresses confidence in the canonicity of Revelation. The list also does not specify the number of Johannine epistles as three.
See also: First seven Ecumenical Councils.
Eusebius, in his Church History, mentioned the books of New Testament according to him:[75]